The election is lining up to be one where candidates are defined by their positions on gun control rather than one based on who is best qualified to actually run the country. Recent news reports are that Ds are trying to position themselves based on gun control proposals.

The gun control issue is very simple ... if you think gun ownership is a problem, then repeal the 2nd Amendment. Go for it. The Constitution provides for mechanisms to do so, and we have had many examples of amendments when social consensus was such that change was demanded. In my lifetime, we extended the right to vote to 18 year olds with relatively little strum and drang. If the majority of Americans believed that the 2nd Amendment was outdated, then it would not be hard to amend the Constitution.

Likewise, if you disagree with Roe v Wade, or Citizens United, or Obergefell, the solution is to amend the Constitution. Go for it. Or pack the Supreme Court with Justices who share your political view (which Roosevelt proposed when the Supreme Court opposed his Depression era policies).

It appears to me, however, that politicians -- both left and right -- don't want the definitive solution to social issues that amendments would create and/or they do not propose an amendment because they know they do not enjoy the support of the majority of the American people. They run for office based on stirring up voters on these polarizing issues -- that's what makes people open their political check books. In a perfect world, we'd kick such charlatans out of office instead of electing and re-electing them.